Hot Topics:

Opinion

Editorial: Health care has its day in court

We hope the Affordable Care Act is upheld — and that lawmakers will later do more to contain costs.

By The Denver Post

Posted:
03/26/2012 01:00:00 AM MDT

Volunteer Anita McIntyre, left, and staff member Angela Grills make calls on a phone bank at an Obama campaign office in Lakewood last week. A handful of nurses and other volunteers took up their cell phones last week to call voters and talk up the health care overhaul.
(Ed Andrieski, The Associated Press)

Today the U.S. Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments on one of the more important and controversial issues to come before justices in a decade — the constitutionality of the nation's landmark health care law.

Though we have taken issue with various parts of the broad 2010 legislation, we support the individual mandate, which is at the core of questions before the court.

We have always understood how some may chafe at the notion of being forced to buy health care coverage. However, we think the framing of it as a valid exercise of Congress' taxing authority puts the mandate on sound legal ground.

And we are even more certain of the need for universal participation in health care coverage in order for the health care system to work fairly.

If you require treatment for everyone who shows up at a hospital for emergency care yet not require everyone to get coverage, significant problems and inequities are going to emerge. And that is exactly what has happened.

And while the court's decision could have profound implications for health care, it also has the potential to shape the political fate of President Obama, who is up for re-election in the fall.

Advertisement

In addition, the decision could more fully define the limits of power for the nation's legislative branch.

There are four key issues before the court.

The most important, as we have mentioned, is whether the individual mandate passes constitutional muster.

Another is whether the mandate falls within federal lawmakers' power to tax.

A third has to do with the severability of the mandate — that is, if the mandate is unconstitutional, do other parts of the broad, 2,700-page Affordable Care Act survive?

And lastly, the court will examine conflict over the expansion of the federal-state partnership concerning Medicaid.

The court has set aside three days for arguments, which is an extraordinary amount of time and signifies just how important justices consider the case to be.

Unfortunately, Americans won't be able to watch the historic arguments unfold because the court still clings to its policy of no cameras in the courtroom. The court has acceded to expedited release of audio, which it has done on rare occasions. That will provide at least some window on deliberations.

The decision, expected in late June, almost certainly will not end the debate over the controversial health care law, nor should it.

If upheld — and we hope it is — lawmakers should revise the measure to better contain costs, which we see as the main failing of the law.

As written, the health care overhaul ensures people will have access to care and will be required to pay for it. It's a good place to start, but it's certainly not the place to end.